Wilful failure to file a tax return was not required; conviction stood, but the fine was reduced as technical breach.

Section 15(a) of the Sales Tax Act was construed to impose liability where a return required by the Act and the rules is not filed; the word "wilfully" was not read as qualifying the entire provision so as to excuse a person who merely claims ignorance of the law. The court held that a person is presumed to know the law and that omission to comply with Rule 6 did not avoid the offence. The conviction was upheld, but the breach was treated as technical and the sentence was reduced by lowering the fine and directing refund of the excess.

---

---

Issues: Whether, under Section 15 of the Sales Tax Act, a person who fails to submit a return as required by the Act and the rules is liable only if the failure is wilful, and whether the petitioner's conviction and sentence were sustainable.

Analysis: Section 15(a) was construed as making liability attach to a failure to submit a return when the return is required by the Act and the rules. The word "wilfully" was not read as governing the entire provision so as to exempt a person merely because he professed ignorance of the law. The Court reasoned that every person is presumed to know the law and that a mere omission to act in accordance with it does not avoid liability. Since the rules then in force required the petitioner to submit a return under Rule 6, the offence was made out. The Court further treated the breach as technical and took into account that the fine imposed was excessive in the circumstances.

Conclusion: The conviction was upheld, but the sentence was reduced by lowering the fine from Rs. 50 to Rs. 5, with refund of the excess amount.

---